From my estimates there are 47 speakers of which 41 are male (note - these are inferences of gender and may be inaccurate). That comes out to an estimate of 87% male speakers. That is just not good. The microbiome field has a good sample pool of people of diverse backgrounds that could be speakers at meetings and thus meetings that are this skewed in diversity should not be supported.

Friday, March 09, 2018

UPDATE 3/9/2018 - See Comments. Carly Rosewarne coined the term last year ...
-------------------------------------------------------

A while back I coined the term "YAMMM" - yet another mostly male meeting - to reflect my frustration in seeing meetings where most of the presenters were male:

What to do when you realize the meeting you are speaking at is a YAMMM (yet another mostly male meeting)?
I have since written dozens of posts about such meetings. Sadly this is not an unusual thing. Fortunately there has been a growing movement in many communities, including in science, to critique and not support such "MANELs". Progress is definitely being made. But it is piecemeal and in my opinion we must still keep up the fight for meetings and conferences to better reflect the diversity of people doing interesting and important work that should be heard. I am sure many fields still are seeing slow progress in this area but one that frustrates me personally is the microbiome arena. So today I am coining a new term - YAMMMM (note the extra M). Yet Another Mostly Male Microbiome Meeting.

I decided to update my mini image about this so I went to world and entered some common male names and some numbers for them.

Saturday, March 03, 2018

UPDATE 4/4 2018. See embedded Twitter Moment at the end of this post for, well, some issues.

I have been thinking a lot about Acknowledgement sections for papers over the last few years. One aspect of this is that I am trying to do a better job about acknowledging all the various people and agencies that provided some type of assistance for papers of mine. I don't always do a good job of this, but I am trying to do better. And in thinking about doing this I wondered if there was any easy way to track and quantify and make use of information in Acknowledgements.

Now, I am not an information science person or a bibliometrics person so I am not really sure how much effort there has been in tracking contributions in Acknowledgement sections but I have noticed one thing that makes this hard to do. Some Acknowledgement sections use only initials of people when they are recognized. Others use full names but names can be ambiguous. But there is a better way. If, when people thank someone in the Acknowledgements, they include a person's ORCID ID, then we have a way of tracking the recognition that people are being given.

The authors would like to thank Summer Williams for the inception of the idea to get Science Cheerleader involved in space research. In addition we give thanks to Carl Carruthers at Nanoracks LLC for managing our space payload. We are also grateful to Holly Menninger and Rob Dunn for sharing data from the Wildlife of Our Homes pilot project, and Steven Kimball (orchid.org/0000-0001-5224-0952) for publishing the original version of Fig. 7 in an open access journal, as well as sharing the underlying data.

I could not find ORCID IDs for four of them, but for one, Steven Kembel, I could. Alas, when the article was first published, Steven's name was spelled wrong and the ORCID link was a bit messed up. Fortunately, we needed to publish a correction to the article for some issues in the use of some terminology and due to some other parts where some editing errors existed. And just a few days ago the correction was published.

Now the Acknowledgements read:

The authors would like to thank Summer Williams for the inception of the idea to get Science Cheerleader involved in space research. In addition we give thanks to Carl Carruthers at Nanoracks LLC for managing our space payload. We are also grateful to Holly Menninger and Rob Dunn for sharing data from the Wildlife of Our Homes pilot project, and Steven Kembel (ORCID ID: 0000-0001-5224-0952) for publishing the original version of Fig. 7 in an open access journal, as well as sharing the underlying data.

There is no longer a link to ORCID (not sure why) but that is OK - at least the ID is there.

Also I convinced a friend and colleague Raquel Peixoto to add my ORCID ID in an Acknowledgment section in a paper of hers:

We thank Jonathan A. Eisen, ORCID ID 0000-0002-0159-2197, and Alexandre Rosado for their helpful comments to improve the manuscript.

I call on the broader community to do this as much as possible for Acknowledgement sections because then it will be easier to actually connect Acknowledgements to people.

UPDATE 4/4

So then I posted this post. And some people liked it. And others, well, did not. And, well, I made a summary of some of the response in a Twitter moment.
---------